Justia U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Paul and Melinda Muskrat brought a civil rights action on behalf of their disabled son against the school district where he attended school for several years and against certain school district employees. The Muskrats alleged that the defendants unconstitutionally subjected their son to timeouts and physical abuse. The school district moved to dismiss, arguing that the Muskrats had not exhausted their claims through administrative procedures established by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The district court denied this motion, ruling that the Muskrats had no obligation to exhaust their claims. The case then proceeded to discovery and the defendants eventually moved for summary judgment, arguing that no constitutional violation occurred. The district court agreed and granted defendants' motions. The Tenth Circuit affirmed in all respects. "First, plaintiffs' claims [did] not fail for lack of exhaustion. Second, reaching the merits, the district court did not err in concluding the defendants' conduct did not shock the conscience, nor did it have an obligation to evaluate the claims under the reasonableness standard of the Fourth Amendment." View "Muskrat v. Deer Creek Public Schools" on Justia Law

Pro se Petitioner prisoner Terry Lee Childs appealed a district court's dismissal of his civil rights case filed under 42 U.S.C. 1983. Petitioner was housed at the James Crabtree Correctional Center (JCCC) in Helena, Oklahoma, but he was formerly housed at the Lawton Correctional Facility (LCF) in Lawton. Petitioner filed his complaint asserting that defendants, who were all employees of LCF, violated state and federal law by delaying the refilling of his asthma medication prescription in May 2008 in retaliation against him for exercising his federal constitutional right to file administrative grievances about his medical care. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), or, in the alternative, for summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The magistrate judge recommended that defendants' motion to dismiss be granted with respect to Petitioner's two state-law claims. But the magistrate judge concluded that Petitioner's federal claim for retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights was not conclusory and recommended that it be allowed to proceed. Petitioner filed objections to the recommendation, as did defendants. The district court disagreed with the magistrate judge's recommendation as to the federal claim and entered an order granting defendants' motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) as to all three claims. The district court ultimately granted Petitioner four extensions of time to file his amended complaint, but gave him a final deadline of February 1, 2012, and warned him not to expect any further extensions of time. On February 9, 2012, Petitioner filed an untimely proposed amended complaint and requested a fifth extension of time. Defendants opposed the motion. The district court determined that Petitioner failed to correct the defects in his existing retaliation claim and had also added a new claim (without leave of court) based on seventeen pages of new factual allegations. The court denied Petitioner's motion for a fifth extension of time and his motion to file his proposed amended complaint, and entered a judgment of dismissal. Petitioner appealed the dismissal of his original complaint. Finding no abuse of discretion, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "Childs v. Miller" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant Eric Madrid appealed his conviction on one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant pled guilty to the charge but preserved his right to appeal the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Before the Tenth Circuit, Defendant asserted that the evidence against him resulted from an investigatory stop that lacked reasonable suspicion in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Finding no error in the district court's decision, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "United States v. Madrid" on Justia Law

Richard Bensinger produced and screened a film about Spacecon Specialty Contractors, LLC. Claiming the film conveyed several defamatory statements, Spacecon filed suit against Bensinger in federal district court based on diversity jurisdiction, and asserting a state-law claim for defamation per se. The district court granted Bensinger's motion for summary judgment, concluding the messages conveyed by the film involved matters of public concern and Spacecon did not show Bensinger published the film with actual malice. Finding no abuse of the district court's discretion, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "Spacecon Specialty Contractors v. Bensinger" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant Christopher Lucero appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence. Defendant was sentenced before the effective date of the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA). He asserted that the district court erred in failing to apply the FSA and its current statutory mandatory minimum sentencing scheme retroactively to reduce his sentence for possession of cocaine base. "At the heart of Lucero's argument lies the issue of whether the reduction of his sentence post FSA is a sentencing to which the FSA's reduced mandatory minimums apply. The Tenth Circuit was not persuaded by Defendant's arguments for retroactive application of the FSA, and affirmed his original sentence. View "United States v. Lucero" on Justia Law

A jury convicted Defendant Theodore "Cush" McDowell of one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 1,000 kilograms of marijuana. Prior to trial, Defendant unsuccessfully sought to suppress evidence seized in the house where he was arrested. He appealed the denial of his motion to suppress as well as two sentencing issues. Finding no error in the district court's denial or sentence, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "United States v. McDowell" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant David Shuck was charged with five counts: conspiracy to manufacture 100 or more marijuana plants; the manufacture of 100 or more marijuana plants; two counts of the use and maintenance of a place for the purpose of manufacturing marijuana; and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. Defendant entered a conditional guilty plea on all five counts and was sentenced in 2012 to eighteen months. Defendant argued to the Tenth Circuit that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress, and that the district erred in denying his motion for an additional downward departure in sentencing. Finding no error, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court. View "United States v. Shuck" on Justia Law

Defendant Abasi Baker was convicted on seven counts each of robbery affecting commerce, use of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, and being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant appealed his convictions, raising two arguments: (1) that use of a global-positioning-system (GPS) tracking device on his car violated his Fourth Amendment rights, and (2) that the evidence was insufficient to convict him on the eight firearms counts associated with the first four robberies. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit did not reach the merits of Defendant’s Fourth Amendment argument because he waived it by failing to raise it before trial. And the Court rejected Defendant’s argument that the evidence was insufficient for a rational jury to find that he possessed the identified firearm at the times charged. View "United States v. Baker" on Justia Law

Plaintiffs were high school students from Roswell, New Mexico who belonged to a religious group called "Relentless." They sued the Roswell Independent school district and its superintendent seeking declaratory and injunctive relief for allegedly violating their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights by preventing them from distributing 2500 rubber fetus dolls to other students. They also challenged the District's policies requiring preapproval before distributing any non-school-sponsored materials on school grounds. Teachers complained that students' preoccupation with the dolls disrupted classroom instruction: "[w]hile teachers were trying to instruct, students threw dolls and doll heads across classrooms, at one another, and into wastebaskets. Some teachers said the disruptions took eight to 10 minutes each class period, and others said their teaching plans were derailed entirely. An honors freshman English class canceled a scheduled test because students had become engaged in name calling and insults over the topic of abortion. A Roswell security officer described the day as 'a disaster' because of the dolls." A magistrate judge granted summary judgment for the District on all claims and Plaintiffs appealed. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise and equal protection claims. The Court also affirmed dismissal of Plaintiffs' facial challenge to the District's preapproval policies. View "Taylor v. Roswell Independent School Dist. " on Justia Law

Prisoner-Petitioner Gary Abernathy appealed a district court judgment which dismissed his petition for the writ of habeas corpus. On appeal to the Tenth Circuit, petitioner argued that the district court miscalculated his sentence based on an allegedly faulty interpretation of United States Supreme Court precedent in "Chambers v. United States" (555 U.S. 122 (2009)). Finding no error with the district court's calculation, the Tenth Circuit affirmed that court's judgment and dismissed Petitioner's petition for habeas relief. View "Abernathy v. Wandes" on Justia Law